Are climate protesters to blame if they are hit or run over?
(3 votes)
Loading...
(3 votes)Loading...
(3 votes)Loading...Similar Posts
What makes a city sustainable?
What does a city need to have to be sustainable? Please define the reasons given precisely. Thank you in advance!!! 😁😁
Can I throw away old wallpaper in the normal waste?
ByTigrenka
I am currently renovating my home and don't know where to throw the old wallpaper… Do the wallpapers belong in the residual waste bin or can they also go in the paper container?
GDR soldiers?
GDR soldiers who were given the order to shoot at the Wall and shot GDR refugees must be living in the Federal Republic of Germany at the moment. Were they convicted of this or do they simply live in the country to which they prevented others from reaching?
How do you deal with it?
I would like to emigrate, but never give up my German citizenship.
How do you take organic waste to the organic waste bin?
ByRon825
How do you do that? In a bag? But do you then throw the bag in the bin? Do you empty the bag there?
Topic with controversial issue?
Hello, I am looking for a controversial topic for a social science presentation. Unfortunately I can't think of a controversial topic. Does anyone have any ideas?
Even though I hate climate alarmists and CO2 bashers (no, actually, I can't even hate them), I still don't want to kill them or even injure them. If I see them in time, I will spend my whole life braking for EVERYONE so as not to hurt them. Instead, people should be educated that climate change is n't primarily caused by anthropogenic CO2, but by aviation and its harmful emissions.
Chemtrails?
Zirruswolken, Ruß und die fluorierten Verbrennungsrückstände der Additive militärisch genutzten Kerosins.
Since around the turn of the millennium. Which fluorinated alkanes are used is, of course, a military secret. The main goal is to lower the freezing point of kerosene.
Welche konkret und seit wann?
Chlor ist da meines Wissens nicht mit bei. Militärflugzeuge benutzen als Kerosinadditive Fluorierte Alkane.
Welches Kerosin enthält welches Additiv mit FCKW?
Es kommt darauf an wie und wo sie sich festkleben. Wenn man sich plötzlich auf einer stark befahrenen Autobahn festkleben kann es passieren. Ob die Klebeproteste Sinn machen steht auf einem anderen Blatt.
Sie tragen eine entscheidende Mitschuld, da sie den Autofahrer dazu nötigen. Ich will es nicht verteidigen aber ihnen ist das Risiko klar und sie müssen dann auch mit den Konsequenzen leben. Auch wenn ein Autofahrer dann mal auch etwas aufdringlicher wird
Ein paar Minuten Wartezeit “nötigen” einen zu einem Mordversuch ?
Wieso gibt es dann nicht ständig Morde an eine Kaufhauskassenschlage oder an roten Ampeln ?
Mord beeinhaltet Vorsatz, er wollte vorbeifahren.
Polemischer, aber guter Vergleich !
Well, I really don't think your comparison is apt. Aside from the fact that I wouldn't defend drivers doing this, I think these climate stickers aren't just demanding "some time to wait," but are actively attacking the population with their demands, thereby causing enormous damage to what is essentially a good cause.
Wie bitte ?
Well, if there's a person on the road and you run them over, that's bad for you. Sure, and kind of bad for the person you hit, too, but oh well.
Driving a car is a privilege that can be lost. It should be said.
If the demonstration violates the law, as is currently the case with coal mining or climate glue, then it bears a very large share of the blame, and the perpetrator should go unpunished! Unfortunately, our laws are too lenient for that.
If the protests have shown one thing, it is that hardly anyone knows the true state of the world.
I was actually against the climate sticking but apparently there is no gentler way to draw attention to the destruction of our livelihood.
Und es hilft tatsächlich dem Klima, wenn die “Kleber” gehasst werden?
Yes, unfortunately, at some point some angry person will run over the people. I don't think the population can stand it much longer.
Da sie nicht zum Täter sondern auch zum Opfer werden wenn das passiert.
Ich bremse auch für Klimakleber!
You are not entirely to blame for this, the driver is more to blame, but you are also partly to blame
Wie kommst Du auf eine Mitschuld ?
😂😂😂Well then think about who takes your weekly shopping to Aldi/Penny/Lidl, a truck, yes, it produces exhaust fumes…
Ja. Vor allem bei schlechten Sichtverhältnissen, oder Autobahnen/Bundesstraßen.
Paragraph 1 of the StVO doesn't apply to you, does it?
Wenn sich da einer vorsätzlich auf die Autobahn setzt, muss man damit rechnen, dass der seinem Leben ein schnelles Ende bereiten möchte und dem Autofahrer kann man da keine Schuld geben. Die wichtige Frage ist, ob dann, im Nachhinein, die Haftpflichtversicherung des Protestlers noch zahlt.
It makes a hell of a noise at that speed, and it's scary. Not good for the pump.
Hoffentlich. Wenns nicht grad n Punto ist, wärs ja schade drum
Das Verständnis, meine Interpretation wegzulassen?🤔
That's a bold statement. You obviously don't know the 1StVO, or you lack the understanding to omit your interpretation.
No, absolutely not. None of the drivers who hit or run over these people have the right to use their damn car as a weapon in such a situation.
In my opinion, in addition to being prosecuted for criminal offenses, anyone who does something like this should have their driving license permanently revoked for being unfit to drive a motor vehicle.
And don't come to me with any accusations of complicity in traffic conditions; these people are also road users, albeit at rest.
Here I refer to paragraph 1 of the StVO.
No.
There is no question that the protesters are being provocative.
Drivers are annoyed by this, but that is still no reason to kill someone, run them over, etc.
Das liegt dann an den Autofahrern. Zumindest solange sich niemand mit Absicht vor ein fahrendes Auto wirft.
Yes, they are. Definitely! Anyone who actively rushes out onto the streets to spread a message no one wants to hear and doesn't change anything has only themselves to blame. Like the deer that runs in front of your car…
What a view of humanity…..
Wer die Gefahr kennt, aber absichtlich ignoriert, verdient nicht mein Mitgefühl.
What messages do deer have to spread?
I'm asking for a friend.
In order to answer your question properly, the person who answered must first ask his friend for whom he answered 😉
Deer also rush in front of cars, even though they know the logical consequences of a collision. Yet they do so out of an impulse that tells them they absolutely have to cross the road, similar to the activists who stay on the road even though they know it's pointless. That's called personal responsibility. Animals have it just as much as humans. Anyone who touches a hot stovetop should be aware that it will be hot the next time, and that it will still cause pain.
But if you don't want to accept the consequences, you shouldn't be afraid of death, even in the worst case scenario.
Cool… Following your logic, I'll just smash the skull of the next driver who spreads the message that the road belongs to them by slamming on the brakes in front of me in the cycle lane without signaling or looking back. Agreed?
You can do that. He must know that he's wrong in assuming the street belongs to him, so he has to expect these consequences, I agree with you there.
If you listen to the opinions here, it opens up completely new procedures for stress reduction that are caused by complete idiots.^^
And I said quite clearly: yes, they are. Because they are actively calling it about.
And regarding misanthropy; anyone who values other species MORE than their own is a misanthrope.
And regarding climate change, I have some information for everyone out there that seems to have been completely lost in the information age of opinions: Planet Earth is currently transitioning from the cold period to the warm period (from a cosmic perspective). Warming is inevitable, even if we stop producing CO2 overnight.
Many people don't even know that the Earth didn't even have polar ice caps for over 80% of its existence, but they want to convince us that we, in about four generations of human history, have triggered such extreme change that it is irreversible and catastrophic. Here are my sources:
“For at least 80 percent of Earth’s history, even the two poles were free of ice and snow.”
https://www.tagesspiegel.de/wissen/auf-der-erde-war-es-meist-eher-heiss-als-kalt-3853552.html
We even need CO2 to maintain a certain level of warmth on this planet for flora and fauna. But nobody wants to hear about that.
But it's clear why climate change is so hyped. If you scare someone, they'll spend their money on solar panels, supposedly cheaper electric cars, tiny houses, etc.
It's all a marketing gimmick. If our ancestors survived cold and warm periods 200,000 years ago with differences of up to 6-7 degrees Celsius (without technological aids), why can't we survive with 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming?
Because it's all a marketing gimmick! And the activists are its missionaries.
The potential risk of blocking ambulances is the deciding factor in my reluctance to support this type of protest, even though I share the demonstrators' sense of urgency. I don't disagree with you there at all, except perhaps with your blanket accusation of misanthropy .
The issue, however, was whether activists who were run over were to blame themselves.
But for those for whom help comes too late, the criminal proceedings are of no importance.
And active blocking (not just by regular car drivers, but also by police, firefighters, and ambulances) is always a given during a blockade. The activists know this, but they don't care because they're misanthropic.
My argument only refers to conscious and deliberate starting.
If demonstrators prevent immediate emergency aid through their blockade, I would be in favor of clarifying the matter through criminal proceedings.
Well, I've heard that activists have been harassed, humiliated, and intimidated, but I haven't heard that anyone has deliberately run them over. I also don't think anyone would go along with killing someone just because they were late for work.
People are simply frustrated because they're being denied the work of thinking about nature conservation for themselves and acting on it in their own way. Activists only have two opinions: their own and the wrong one. This makes them all narrow-minded people who constantly try to play along with the big guys but don't understand the rules.
In any case, I think it's a good thing that the penalties for such people can be increased to up to one year in prison, because in the worst case scenario they could block an ambulance or fire engine from reaching the scene of an accident, which could in turn cause deaths.
If the aim is to stop flowing traffic by running into the road, the activists concerned are responsible or partly responsible for accidents, depending on the case.
If stationary traffic deliberately starts moving again and a fatality is accepted, the driver must be held responsible.
This is true in all constitutional states on my planet. The question is which scenario the questioner is referring to.
Well, I always see activists on the news rushing into the streets and actively blocking cars. I don't know what planet you're watching TV on. Apparently not this one.
Ich gehe von einem angehaltenen Auto aus, das bewusst wieder beschleunigt wird und jemanden überfährt, von dessen Anwesenheit der Fahrer weiß.
Wenn du von etwas anderem ausgehst, etwa einen herzhaften Sprung vor ein fahrendes Auto, dann sag es bitte einfach.
I think so too…where is my sledgehammer?
Hopefully, in your statement, you recognize the difference between actively killing someone by violent drivers and deliberately ignoring the danger in the heat of the moment. The one is a crime, and the other is stupidity. The crime is punished, but unfortunately, the stupidity is not punished to its full extent.
Furthermore, activists don't have to provoke, but they do so anyway. Ignorance is their motivation, nothing else.
But violent assholes who would knowingly run over defenseless people deserve your sympathy for being forced to stop?
Legally certainly not, but let me put it this way: yes, they did. A pointless action.
Verzweifelte, bestimmt nicht sinnlose Aktion. Der eine oder andere automobile Individualverkehrsteilnehmer merkt ja manchmal doch noch was….selten, aber es besteht Hoffnung.
Alles was du sinnlos findest, berechtigt also andere, anderen Leid zuzufügen?
Ich finde deine Antwort auch sinnlos.
Hoffentlich sieht sich jetzt keiner genötigt dir was anzutun.
…so does that justify others inflicting suffering on others?
It's about GUILT for the things that could happen during such an action. I'm not talking about causing pain to others; don't interpret it into anything.
Here are such extreme answers like "They deserve it…" and you accuse me of something so disgusting? Oh, I see.
And if the ambulance can't get past because of them & accidentally hits them, it's 0% their fault👍🏻They're angels, okay, you're right about everything.
Angenommen es ist kein Vorsatz des Autofahrers… Ja, eigene Dummheit. Befolge die Gesetze und die StVO und man lebt sicherer.
Du kennst wohl weder das eine noch das andere, oder ?
Nicht in und auswendig, aber punktelos und noch nie verurteilt ^^
Where does the extremist show consideration? People have to go to work, pick up their children, and have appointments. Furthermore, he is clearly hindering other people (=coercion), who are being detained as a result.
I think it's wonderful how strongly you're supporting extremists here.
Inwiefern, deiner Ansicht nach ?
Ich kenne ihn. Aber gegen den verstößt der Klimaextremist vor dem Autofahrer.
Wenn du 1StVO kennen würdest und verinnerlicht hättest, würdest du erkennen, das weder der Vorsatz des klebenden noch des Autofahrers eine Rolle spielt.
e.g. never from a car, which could be because I have never stuck myself to the road ^^
Das heißt nur, das du nie erwischt worden bist.
Selbstverständlich. Wenn jemand vor den Zug springt so hat auch nicht der Zugführer die Schuld.
If the train has stopped and starts moving even though there is someone on the track in front of it, the driver is obviously at fault, even if the stop was illegal.
Nobody jumps in front of a train. Someone is blocking a road for a good reason. Unlike a railway line, this road blockage can be avoided in almost all cases – admittedly with a loss of time, but this is hardly significant in the normal daily traffic jams in and around larger cities.
Do you realize how much straw is lying around in your statement, right?
Ich fürchte nicht.
Selbstverständlich, bedeutet es versteht sich ohne Erklärung.
Selbstverständlich ist das Unsinn was du da schreibst.
Soll etwa das Opfer schuld sein?
Wie weltfremd muss man sein um sich auf der Straße festzukleben
Nicht halb so weltfremd wie den Ist-Zustand der welt zu ignorieren.
Ach ja? Den Zustand der Welt kann aber niemand mehr ändern schon gar nicht mit solchen Aktionen.
Weltfremdheit, ob hier gegeben oder nicht, legitimiert den Feststellenden aber nicht zu Gewalt, erst recht nicht zu potenziell tödlicher.
Not intentional, but if an accident occurs, even if it results in death, it's the fault of the climate person. The person, or their will, should also cover any possible treatments. It's certainly not easy for the driver.
Wenn Menschen leicht erregbar sind, so kann das durchaus geschehen, dass die Klima-Klebervon der Straße losgerissen werden und zu Schaden kommen. No Risk, No Fun. Berufsrisiko. Ist ja deren Fulltime-Job. Schlecht bezahlt übrigends
Bewusst Demonstranten überfahrende Autofahrer entsprechen nicht der allgemeinen Vorstellung von Gesetz und gesellschaftlicher Ordnung.
Nur ein Extremist wäre in der Lage, dies in Verblendung nicht zu bemerken.
Probably ^^ but I'm not an extremist. I'm always in favor of protesters obeying the law.
Anyone who thinks they can place themselves above the social order, above the laws, to the detriment of their fellow human beings, can leave – in whatever way they choose.
That's how some people will think about you too.
Well, my sympathy for extremists is limited. And if a few of them die, it would only be a positive thing for humanity. Which, of course, doesn't mean we should help them along.
That would depend too much on the individual case for you to be able to make such a general statement.
Anyone who accelerates a stopped car and drives over a person they know is going to jail for homicide, usually for murder with the lowest motives.
The rest of your post is perverse cynicism, the kind produced by similarly minded people who want their relatives to pay for the bullets for those executed.